When we communicate with customers about thermal shock chamber, we will mention the cooling methods, air cooling and water cooling. At this time, customers will ask us about the difference between the two cooling methods. The following is a comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of the two cooling methods in terms of temperature control efficiency, energy consumption, maintenance, etc.
A. Water cooling thermal shock chamber
Advantages:
1. High temperature control accuracy:
- The water circulation system has stable heat dissipation and small temperature fluctuation (within ±0.5℃), which is suitable for impact testing of precision devices (such as chips and sensors).
2. Fast cooling speed:
- The heat dissipation efficiency of water cooling is 30%~50% higher than that of air cooling, and the time from high temperature (such as 150℃) to low temperature (-40℃) can be shortened to within 10 minutes.
3. More economical energy consumption:
- After the water temperature reaches the set value, the compressor does not need to continue to run at full load, which saves about 20%~30% energy compared to air cooling.
4. Low noise and low dust:
- No fan high-speed operation noise (usually <55dB), and the water circulation is closed to prevent dust from entering the test chamber and affecting the sample.
Disadvantages:
1. High installation requirements:
- External cooling water (such as softened water) is required, and the water temperature must be controlled at 5~30℃, otherwise it is easy to scale and block the pipe.
2. High maintenance cost:
- Rust inhibitors need to be replaced regularly and condensers need to be cleaned. If the water quality is poor, the heat exchanger may corrode, and the maintenance cost is high.
3. Large size:
- An independent water tank and water circulation pipeline are required, and the equipment covers an area 20%~30% larger than the same specification air-cooled type.
B. Air cooling thermal shock chamber
Advantages:
1. Flexible installation:
- No external water source is required, plug in and use, suitable for rapid deployment in the laboratory or on-site.
2. Easy maintenance:
- The main maintenance parts are the fan and filter, which only need to be cleaned of dust, and the consumables cost is low (the annual maintenance cost is about 1/3 of the water-cooled type).
3. Compact size:
- There is no complex water circulation system, the equipment is small, and it is suitable for scenes with limited space (such as vehicle-mounted testing).
Disadvantages:
1. Low temperature control accuracy:
- The wind circulation is easily affected by airflow, and the temperature uniformity is usually ±2℃, with a large fluctuation range (more than ±1℃).
2. Slow cooling speed:
- It takes about 15~20 minutes to drop from 150℃ to -40℃, which is more than 50% slower than the water-cooled type, affecting the test efficiency.
3. High energy consumption and noise:
- The fan runs continuously at high speed (noise>65dB), and the compressor load is large. The long-term operation electricity cost is 40%~50% higher than the water-cooled type.
4. Dust interference:
- Air circulation may bring in environmental dust. If the test sample has high requirements for cleanliness (such as medical equipment), additional dust removal devices are required.
Comparison of application scenarios
- Water cooling is more suitable for: semiconductors, aerospace and other scenarios with high requirements for temperature accuracy and speed, or mass production tests that require 24-hour continuous operation.
- Air cooling is more suitable for: research and development tests in university laboratories and small enterprises, or scenarios that require installation convenience over performance.
Summary and suggestions
- If the budget is sufficient and high accuracy is sought, choose water cooling; if cost and flexibility are emphasized, choose air cooling. When actually selecting, a comprehensive evaluation should be made in combination with the test standard (such as GJB 150A, IEC 60068), sample type and frequency of use.
